When is killing someone ok?

[Penumbra]

In your opinion, what situations, if any, make it ethically reasonable to purposefully take a human life?

Edit: Also, if you provide a scenario where killing is ok, please elaborate as to why. If you believe killing is never ok, please explain that as well. Thanks!

-Lyn

 

[Polycarp_fan]

In your opinion, what situations, if any, make it ethically reasonable to purposefully take a human life?

-Lyn

In the case where you are stronger, healthier or are more fertile than the human you are ridding from the species.

Perfect scientific answer. Of course the answer I presented is based on the situation that science is used as a matter of determing the value of all living things.

 

[Penumbra]

In the case where you are stronger, healthier or are more fertile than the human you are ridding from the species.

Perfect scientific answer. Of course the answer I presented is based on the situation that science is used as a matter of determing the value of all living things.

Does science say that? Why is that a good scientific reason?

And the OP asked:
In your opinion, what situations, if any, make it ethically reasonable to purposefully take a human life?

Which you didn't answer.

-Lyn

 

[IzzyPop]

When the caffeine headaches start.

 

[LittleNipper]

In your opinion, what situations, if any, make it ethically reasonable to purposefully take a human life?

-Lyn

When you're being attacked.

 

[Penumbra]

When you're being attacked.

Thank you.

What if someone else is being attacked, but not you?

Also, can you elaborate as to why it's ok to kill if you're being attacked. It may be self evident to some people, but I'd like to hear the reasoning.

-Lyn

 

[Belk]

In your opinion, what situations, if any, make it ethically reasonable to purposefully take a human life?

-Lyn

I don't know that there is any situation where it is "ethically reasonable". I just know there are certain situations in which I will.

 

[jayem]

Thank you.

What if someone else is being attacked, but not you?

Also, can you elaborate as to why it's ok to kill if you're being attacked. It may be self evident to some people, but I'd like to hear the reasoning.

-Lyn

I'm not talking here about situations where killing has been legally mandated, such as capital punishment, or in wartime. I think that's a related, but separate ethical discussion.

I'd say the overall ethical principle is that killing persons is wrong. This derives from our biological instinct towards self-preservation. And also from our evolution as social beings. Our species thrives best in society, which cannot exist if members are constantly killing each other. It follows then, that if someone is attempting to kill another person, he should be stopped. Using non-lethal force to stop the attack would be preferred, but if that should be inadequate, then killing the attacker is a lesser evil than allowing him to kill someone else. So killing in defense of self or others is ethical, but only in a relative sense when compared to the alternative.

Kinda wordy. But I hope it's clear.

 

[Penumbra]

I'm not talking here about situations where killing has been legally mandated, such as capital punishment, or in wartime. I think that's a related, but separate ethical discussion.

I'd say the overall ethical principle is that killing persons is wrong. This derives from our biological instinct towards self-preservation. And also from our evolution as social beings. Our species thrives best in society, which cannot exist if members are constantly killing each other. It follows then, that if someone is attempting to kill another person, he should be stopped. Using non-lethal force to stop the attack would be preferred, but if that should be inadequate, then killing the attacker is a lesser evil than allowing him to kill someone else. So killing in defense of self or others is ethical, but only in a relative sense when compared to the alternative.

Kinda wordy. But I hope it's clear.

Thank you.

It's mostly clear. The only thing that's a little unclear is the part I put in bold. Can you elaborate as to why killing the attacker is a lesser evil than allowing him to kill someone else?

It may be an obvious answer but I'd like to hear the reasoning behind it.

-Lyn

 

[csp1073]

Lyn, I think the reasoning is that if Person A is attempting to kill person B (who is in innocent) it is more reasonable to eliminate Person A who is destructive to society than it is to allow him to kill innocent people.

 

[LittleNipper]

Thank you.

What if someone else is being attacked, but not you?

Also, can you elaborate as to why it's ok to kill if you're being attacked. It may be self evident to some people, but I'd like to hear the reasoning.

-Lyn

One is certainly allowed to strike back in an effort to prevent injury of any sort and if the attacker is seriously hurt or killed in that struggle, oh well, the attacker reaped what he sowed and died the way he was attempting to live.

 

[jayem]

Thank you.

It's mostly clear. The only thing that's a little unclear is the part I put in bold. Can you elaborate as to why killing the attacker is a lesser evil than allowing him to kill someone else?

It may be an obvious answer but I'd like to hear the reasoning behind it.

-Lyn

To put it in general terms, I'd say that once an ethical violation has occured, the imperative then becomes to counteract, or correct the violation. So if an attacker is attempting to kill someone, the highest ethical priority is to stop him. And if killing him is the only way possible, that is preferable than allowing him to kill the victim.

 

[ebia]

In your opinion, what situations, if any, make it ethically reasonable to purposefully take a human life?

Edit: Also, if you provide a scenario where killing is ok, please elaborate as to why. If you believe killing is never ok, please explain that as well. Thanks!

-Lyn

Never. There may be occassions when it's the less bad option, or even the least bad option, but it's never okay.

 

[pgp_protector]

In defense of self or others.

 

[Penumbra]

Lyn, I think the reasoning is that if Person A is attempting to kill person B (who is in innocent) it is more reasonable to eliminate Person A who is destructive to society than it is to allow him to kill innocent people.

One is certainly allowed to strike back in an effort to prevent injury of any sort and if the attacker is seriously hurt or killed in that struggle, oh well, the attacker reaped what he sowed and died the way he was attempting to live.

So am I correct in understanding that your position is that the attacker is of less worth than the victim because of his actions? In other words, by committing very bad deeds, he has forfeited all or some of his worth in comparison to another person? (Addressed to both of you.)

And welcome to the forums, csp1073.

To put it in general terms, I'd say that once an ethical violation has occured, the imperative then becomes to counteract, or correct the violation. So if an attacker is attempting to kill someone, the highest ethical priority is to stop him. And if killing him is the only way possible, that is preferable than allowing him to kill the victim.

Thank you.

In defense of self or others.

When you say defense, do you mean physical defense or any kind of defense?

Emotional defense, say, against abuse? Financial defense? Or only defense from immediate physical harm?

-Lyn

 

[Penumbra]

Never. There may be occassions when it's the less bad option, or even the least bad option, but it's never okay.

Thank you.

As an interesting side question, since you mentioned it being the "less bad" choice, do you believe there are some scenarios where there is no truly ethical choice? No correct, good choice?

-Lyn

 

[DaisyDay]

When God commands you to.

See Abraham & Saul.

 

[Penumbra]

When God commands you to.

See Abraham & Saul.

If God commanded you to kill someone, would you do it?

-Lyn

 

[Nooj]

Lyn, I think the reasoning is that if Person A is attempting to kill person B (who is in innocent) it is more reasonable to eliminate Person A who is destructive to society than it is to allow him to kill innocent people.

What if person B is not any more innocent than person A?

 

[Fenny the Fox]

I view killing someone to never be acceptable. In any case. I can imagine no scenario that would allow me to accept that someone should be killed.

I think that, for me, it is not a choice to make. I can not, and will not, kill someone. By words or action ,acceptance or condemnation.

But I begrudge no one for killing a person if they do it in defense. Whether it be in defense of themselves or someone else.